Missing Nukes, Treason of the Highest Order and B-52 Nukes Headed for Iran- Air Force Refused to Fly...

8/12/2019 Missing Nukes, Treason of the Highest Order and B-52 Nukes Headed for Iran- Air Force Refused to Fly Weapons t…

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/missing-nukes-treason-of-the-highest-order-and-b-52-nukes-headed-for-iran- 1/23

Missing Nukes: Treason of the Highest Order

by Mahdi Darius NazemroayaGlobal Research, October 29, 2007

Missing Nukes on August 29-30, 2007

According to a wide range of reports, several nuclear bombs were “lost” for 36hours after taking off August 29/30, 2007 on a “cross-country journey” across the

U.S., from U.S.A.F Base Minot in North Dakota to U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale inLouisiana. [1] Reportedly, in total there were six W80-1 nuclear warheads armed

on AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACMs) that were “lost.” [2] The story

was first reported by the Military Times, after military servicemen leaked the story.

It is also worth noting that on August 27, 2007, just days before the "lost" nukes

incident, three B-52 Bombers were performing special missions under the directauthorization of General Moseley, the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force. [3] Theexercise was reported as being an aerial information and image gathering mission.

The base at Minot is also home of the 91st Space Wings, a unit under the command

of Air Force Space Command (AFSPC).

According to official reports, the U.S. Air Force pilots did not know that they were

carrying weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Once in Louisiana, they also leftthe nuclear weapons unsecured on the runway for several hours. [4]

U.S. Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Plans, and Requirements,Major-General Richard Y. Newton III commented on the incident, saying there

was an “unprecedented” series of procedural errors, which revealed “an erosion ofadherence to weapons-handling standards” [5]

These statements are misleading. The lax security was not the result of procedural

negligence within the U.S. Air Force, but rather the consequence of a deliberate

tampering of these procedures.

If a soldier, marine, airman, or sailor were even to be issued a rifle and riflemagazine — weaponry of a far lesser significance, danger, and cost — there is a

strict signing and accountability process that involves a chain of command and

paperwork. This is part of the set of military checks and balances used by all theservices within the U.S. Armed Forces.



Military servicemen qualified to speak on the subject will confirm that there is a

stringent nuclear weapons handling procedure. There is a rigorous, almostinflexible, chain of command in regards to the handling of nuclear weapons and

not just any soldier, sailor, airman, or marine is allowed to handle nuclear

weapons. Only servicemen specialized in specific handling and loading procedures, are perm certified to handle, access and load nuclear warheads.

Every service personnel that moves or even touches these weapons must sign a

tracking paper and has total accountability for their movement. There is goodreason for the paperwork behind moving these weapons. The military officers that

order the movement of nuclear weapons, including base commanders, must also

fill out paper forms.

In other words, unauthorized removal of nuclear weapons would be virtually

impossible to accomplish unless the chain of command were bypassed, involving,in this case, the deliberate tampering of the paperwork and tracking procedures.

The strategic bombers that carried the nuclear weapons also could not fly with their

loaded nuclear weaponry without the authorization of senior military officials andthe base commander. The go-ahead authorization of senior military officials must

be transmitted to the servicemen that upload the nuclear weapons. Without this

authorization no flights can take place.

In the case of the missing nukes, orders were given and flight permission was

granted. Once again, any competent and eligible U.S. Air Force member cancertify that this is the standard procedure.

There are two important questions to be answered in relation to the "lost" nukes

incident:

1. Who gave the order to arm the W80-1 thermonuclear warheads on the AGM-

129 Advanced Cruise Missiles (ACMs)? At what level in the military hierarchy didthis order originate? How was the order transmitted down the command chain?

2. If this was not a procedural error, what was the underlying military-political

objective sought by those who gave the orders?

The Impossibility of "Losing" Nuclear Weapons



As Robert Stormer, a former U.S. lieutenant-commander in the U.S. Navy, has

commented: “Press reports initially cited the Air Force mistake of flying nuclearweapons over the United States in violation of Air Force standing orders and

international treaties, while completely missing the more important major issues,

such as how six nuclear cruise missiles got loose to begin with.” [6]

Stormer also mak es a key point, which is not exactly a secret: “There is a strictchain of custody for all such weapons. Nuclear weapons handling is spelled out in

great detail in Air Force regulations, to the credit of that service. Every person whoorders the movement of these weapons, handles them, breaks seals or moves any

nuclear weapon must sign off for tracking purposes.” [7]

Stormer continues:

“Two armed munitions specialists are required to work as a team with all nuclearweapons. All individuals working with nuclear weapons must meet very strictsecurity standards and be tested for loyalty — this is known as a ‘[Nuclear

Weapons] Personnel Reliability Program [DoDD 5210 42].’ They work in

restricted areas within eyeshot of one another and are reviewed constantly.”[8]

Stormer unwraps the whole Pentagon cover-up by pointing out some logical facts

and military procedures. First he reveals that: “All security forces assigned [tohandle and protect nuclear weapons] are authorized to use deadly force to protect

the weapons from any threat [including would- be thieves].” [9]

He then points out a physical reality that can not be shrugged aside: “Nor does

anyone quickly move a 1-ton cruise missile — or forget about six of them, asreported by some news outlets, especially cruise missiles loaded with high

explosives.”

He further explains another physical and procedural reality about nuclear weapons

assembly:

“The United States also does not transport nuclear weapons meant for eliminationattached to their launch vehicles under the wings of a combat aircraft. The

procedure is to separate the warhead from the missile, encase the warhead and

transport it by military cargo aircraft to a repository — not an operational bomber base that just happens to be the staging area for Middle Eastern operations.” [10]



This last point raises the question of what were the nuclear weapons meant for? In

this context, Stomrer puts forth the following list of important questions to whichhe demands an answer:

1. Why, and for what ostensible purpose, were these nuclear weapons taken toBarksdale?

2. How long was it before the error was discovered?3. How many mistakes and errors were made, and how many needed to be made,

for this to happen?4. How many and which security protocols were overlooked?

5. How many and which safety procedures were bypassed or ignored?

6. How many other nuclear command and control non-observations of procedurehave there been?

7. What is Congress going to do to better oversee U.S. nuclear command and

control?8. How does this incident relate to concern for reliability of control over nuclearweapons and nuclear materials in Russia, Pakistan and elsewhere?

9. Does the Bush administration, as some news reports suggest, have plans to

attack Iran with nuclear weapons?

It is a matter of perception, whether it is “clear” or “unclear”, as to why the nuclear

warheads had not been removed beforehand from the missiles.

For those who have been observing these series of “unclear” events it is becoming

“clear” that a criminal government is at the helm of the United States. There wasno way that the six nuclear missiles could have been “mistakenly” loaded,

especially when their separate warheads had to be affixed to the missiles byindividuals specialized in such a momentous task.

It is also being claimed that military teams in both U.S.A.F. Base Minot and

U.S.A.F. Base Barksdale made major "procedural errors". What are the probabilities of this occurring simultaneously in two locations?

It is also worth noting that original reports from military sources talked about only

five of the six nuclear warheads from Minot being accounted for in Barksdale.[11]

Nuclear warheads are also kept in specialized storage areas or bunkers. Moreover,nuclear weapons are not being decommissioned at Barksdale.



The Role of the Nuclear Weapons Surety Program: What happened to Electronic

Monitoring?

The Nuclear Weapons Surety Program is a joint program between the U.S.

Department of Defence and the U.S. Department of Energy. The National SecurityAgency (NSA) is also involved as well as other U.S. federal government agencies.

The Nuclear Weapons System Safety Program is part of this program, whichinvolves a monitoring and safeguards regime for the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

The Nuclear Weapons Security Standard falls under the Nuclear Weapons Surety

Program and is in place to disallow any “unauthorized access to nuclear weapons;

prevent damage or sabotage to nuclear weapons; prevent loss of custody; and prevent, to the maximum extent possible, radiological contamination caused by

unauthorized acts.”

Under this or these safeguards system there also exists a rigorous control of usescheme, which is tied to the military chain of command and the White House.

“Command and Control (C2)” and “Use Control”

“Use control” is a set of security measures designed to prevent unauthorized access

to nuclear weapons. These measures involve weapons design features, operational procedures, security, and system safety rules.

“Command and Control” or “C2” involves the Office of the President of the UnitedStates of America. C2 is an established line of command, which is tied to the

White House. Without it, nuclear weapons cannot be deployed or armed as theywere in U.S.A.F. Base Minot. It is these two control elements that establish the

basis of authorization through which “absolute control of nuclear weapons” is

maintained “at all times.”

In addition to the checks and balances in place in regards to handling nuclearweapons, the Defence Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) and its partners manually

and electronically inspect and monitor all U.S. nuclear weapons through the Nuclear Weapon Status Information Systems.

More Unanswered Questions: What Happened to the Computerized TrackingSystem?



The Nuclear Management Information Systems “interface with each other and

provide [the U.S. Department of Defence] with the ability to track the location ofnuclear weapons and components from cradle-to-grave [meaning from when they

are made to when they are decommissioned].” [12]

The Military Times also makes an omission that exposes the official narrative as

false and indicates that the event was not just a mistake: “The Defense Departmentuses a computerized tracking program to keep tabs on each one of its nuclear

warheads, said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at theFederation of American Scientists. For the six warheads to make it onto the B-52,

each one would have had to be signed out of its storage bunker and transported to

the bomber.” [13]

This is where the chain of command in regards to military officers falls into play.

If any of the stocked inventories of nuclear weapons are moved to an authorizedlocation they will be noticed and tracked by the DTRA and will require therelevant authorization. There is also a code system involved that is tied to the chain

of command.

The fact that the incident only apparently became known to the U.S. Air Force

when military personnel reported it, suggests that either the nuclear weapons were

ordered to be moved or that the electronic tracking devices had been removed ortampered with. This scenario would need the involvement of individuals with

expertise in military electronics or for those responsible for the monitoring of

nuclear weapons to look the other way or both.

Mysterious Deaths in the United States Air Force: Whitewash and Cover-up

Several military personnel died under mysterious circumstances shortly before and

after the incident. There are now questions regarding the fate of these individuals

in the U.S. Air Force who could have had relationships in one way or another to

the incident or possibly have been directly involved. It is also necessary to statethat there is no proof that these deaths are linked to the August flight from Minot to

Barksdale in question.

Citizens for Legitimate Government has pointed towards the involvement of the

U.S. Air Force in a cover-up and has linked several deaths of U.S. servicemen tothe incident. Lori Price has also stated for Citizens for a Legitimate Government

that “you need about fourteen signatures to get an armed nuke on a B-52.”



Based on several news sources, including the U.S. military, we provide below a

detailed review of these mysterious and untimely deaths of U.S. servicemen.

Todd Blue

Airman 1st Class Todd Blue went on leave days after the nuclear weapons were

“lost.” Blue died under questionable timing while on leave, visiting his family in Wytheville, Virginia at the age of 20 on September 10, 2007. He was a response

force member assigned to the 5th Security Forces Squadron. What does this mean?

Airman Todd Blue occupied a key position in weapons systems security at Minot.[14] At Minot U.S.A.F. Base the 5th Security Forces Squadron to which he

belonged was responsible for base entry requirements and a particular section, the

Weapons System Security section, was responsible for preventing the unauthorizedremoval of military property. The latter is responsible for security of all priority

resources, meaning the security of nuclear weapons. In other words not only did

the 5th Security Forces Squadron keep eyes on what entered and left Minot, butthey kept an eye on and monitored the nuclear weapons.

John Frueh

U.S. Air Force Captain John Frueh is another serviceman who could have been

indirectly connected to the “lost” nuclear weapons. He was reported as being last

seen with a GPS device, camera, and camcorder being carried with him in a backpack. Local police in Oregon and the F.B.I. seemed to be looking for him for

days. His family also felt that something bad had happened to him.

On September 8, 2007 Captain Frueh was found dead in Washington State, near

his abandoned rental car, after the Portland Police Department contacted theSkamania County Sheriff’s Officer. [15] The last time he spoke with his family

was August 30, 2007. He had arrived from Florida to attend a wedding that henever showed up at. The Oregonian reported that “Authorities in Portland found no



the preparations that would have allowed the nuclear weapons to escape detection

by military surveillance and be ready for takeoff.

Reprimands, Replacements and Reassignments in the U.S.A.F. Chain of

Command

Senior officers, including three colonels and a lieutenant-colonel, are amongseventy personnel that will reportedly be disciplined for negligence and for

allowing a B-52H Stratofortress Bomber to fly across the U.S. carrying sixnuclear-armed cruise missiles that should never have been loaded under its wings.

[23]

According to the Military Times, George W. Bush Jr. had been swiftly informed.

This is a lockstep procedure. This illustrates the importance tied to theauthorization needed for handling nuclear weapons. This is part of a two-way process in regards to authorization from the White House.

The commander of the 5th Munitions Squadron and the commander of the 5thBomb Wing, Colonel Bruce Emig, have been replaced along with a series of other

senior officers. This implies that the U.S. Air Force chain of command is directly

involved in this event. None of these senior officers have been authorized to speakor make statements, according to U.S. military sources. Will any of these officers

receive lucrative departure packages? Have they been reassigned?

More generally, the nature of the reprimands directed against senior officers

involved has not been fully disclosed.

The “memory” of the incident is being erased through a reorganization of the ranks

and a purge at U.S.A.F. Base Minot. The streamlining of the chain of command as

well as the mysterious deaths of personnel who could have been involved in the

incident, raise a series of far-reaching questions.

There are several important issues regarding the senior officers’ chain of commandat Minot, which will be addressed in this article. Once again, the most important

questions in regards to the missing nukes are: Who gave the orders and

authorization for the operation and what where the underlying objectives ofloading armed nuclear missiles?



Other Mysterious Deaths: Was the Missing Nukes Incident connected to US War

Plans directed against Iran?

Charles D. Riechers

A U.S. Air Force official, Charles D. Riechers, has been found dead on October

14, 2007. [24] Riechers was a retired Air Force officer and master navigatorspecializing in electronic warfare. He was a member of the Senior Executive

Service of the U.S. Air Force, and was the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of

the Air Force for Acquisition and Management. A description of his dutiesincludes “providing sound expert advice and guidance on acquisition and

procurement policies, as well as formulating, reviewing and, as assigned, execution

of plans, programs and policies relating to organization, function, operation andimprovement of the Air Force’s acquisition system.”

He apparently killed himself by running his car’s engine inside his suburban

garage in Virginia. The death of Charles D. Riechers has been casually linked byThe Washington Post to his involvement in fraudulent activities and

embezzlement. [25] The Washington Post reported that the Air Force had asked

defense contractor, Commonwealth Research Institute (C.R.I.), to give him a jobwith no known duties while he waited for official clearance for his promoted rank

in the Pentagon. Riechers is quoted as saying: “I really didn’t do anything for

C.R.I.,” and “I [still] got a paycheck from them.” The question, of course, waswhether the contractor might expect favours in return upon his assignment to the

Pentagon last January. [26] A mysterious suicide letter expressing shame wassubsequently reported; the letter was reportedly from a man who had already

admitted without shame that he was receiving money for doing nothing. This was

known to the U.S. Senate, which had approved his promotion.

In a report featured by Pravda, Russian Intelligence analysts have said that thereported suicide of Charles D. Riechers was a cover-up and that he was murdered

because of his involvement in the controversial flight of nuclear weapons over thecontinental United States.

Pravda reports that “Russian Intelligence Analysts are reporting today thatAmerican War Leaders have ‘suicided’ [sic] one of their Top US Air Force

Officials Charles D. Riechers as the rift growing between the U.S. War Leaders



and their Top Military Officers over a nuclear attack on Iran appears to be nearing

open war fare.” [27]

According to the Pravda report, the incident was linked to an operation to smuggle

nuclear weapons away from the U.S. military in connection to launching a waragainst Iran.

The Commonwealth Research Institute (CRI), a registered non-profit organization

is a subsidiary of Concurrent Technologies, which is registered with the IRS as atax-exempt charity, which is run by Daniel Richard DeVos. Devos is also an

associate of John P. Murtha, who was investigated by the F.B.I. for his Saudi links.

Certainly the ties of the Commonwealth Research Institute (CRI), a non-profit

organization working for the Pentagon, are questionable and the organization could

be a front for internal operations that bypass most military personnel. The caseappears to be part of an internal operation that was being kept a secret from mostof the U.S. military, but what for?

Russell E. Dougherty

More than a month before the death of Riechers, General Russell Elliot Dougherty,

a retired flag officer, was also reported to have died on September 7, 2007 at his

home in Falcon Landing military retirement community in Potomac Falls locatedin Arlington, Virginia. [28] He once was one of the most senior individuals

responsible for the nuclear arsenal of the U.S. military and also the formercommander of Strategic Air Command (SAC) and director of the Joint Strategic

Target Planning Staff, which identified nuclear targets worldwide amongst its

responsibilities. At Minot next to his obituary was a military information notice on

suicide, telling servicepersons what the signs of suicide are. [29]

Russell Dougherty in the course of his military career in the U.S. Air Force had

dealt with the issues pertaining to Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), fullspectrum dominance, how to defeat the enemy and avoid a nuclear war, other uses

for nuclear weaponry, Nuclear Primacy for the U.S., and tackling the effects of the

wind and weather — due to their unpredictable natures — on the use of nuclearweapons.



The fact that the nuclear warheads were attached to the nuclear cruise missiles

could mean that someone wanted to take the weapons in one step or to use themright away.

Timely Appointments at U.S.A.F. Base Minot

Several of the commanding officers at Minot were freshly appointed in June, 2007.This may have been part of standard procedures, but the timing should not be

ignored.

Colonel Robert D. Critchlow was transferred, just before the incident, from the

Pentagon to Minot and appointed commanding officer for the 91st OperationsGroup, a missileer unit and the operational backbone of the 91st Space Wing. In

Washington, D.C. he was involved in research for the Congressional Research

Services and later posted into Air Force Nuclear Response and Homeland Defence.

Colonel Myron L. Freeman was transferred from Japan to Minot in June, 2007.

Colonel Freeman was appointed as the commander of the 91st Security Forces

Group, which is responsible for securing Minot’s nuclear arsenal.

Colonel Gregory S. Tims was also appointed as deputy commander or vice-

commander of the 91st Space Wing in June, 2007. However, Colonel Tims wastransfered to Minot from California almost a year before.

One of the most senior non-commissioned officers (NCOs) or non-commissionedmembers (NCMs), Chief Master Sergeant Mark R. Clark, was also transferred to

U.S.A.F. Base Minot from Nebraska in July, 2007.

Colonel Roosevelt Allen was also transferred to Minot from Washington, D.C. to

become commander of the 5th Medical Group.

Colonel Bruce Emig, the now-former commander of the 5th Bomb Wing, was alsotransferred to Minot from U.S.A.F. Base Ellsworth in South Dakota in June, 2007.

Colonel Emig was also the base commander of Minot.

Colonel Cynthia M. Lundell, the now-former group commander for the 5th

Maintenance Group, the unit responsible for loading and unloading weaponry ontothe B-52H Stratofortresses was also freshly transferred from a NATO post in

Western Europe in June, 2007. Were these appointments temporary? Were any ofthese appointments related to the six “lost” nuclear missiles?



Prior to the Missing Nukes Incident, Minot Airmen Meet with the President andthe U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff

On June 15, 2007, George W. Bush Jr. met senior officers from U.S.A.F. BaseMinot at U.S.A.F. Base McConnell in Wichita, Kansas during a visit to Boeing’s

Integrated Defense Systems facility. Amongst them was Major Daniel Giacomazzaof the 5th Operational Support Squadron.

Senator Patrick Roberts of Kansas was also present. “While he chaired the Senate

Intelligence Committe from 2002 to 2007, [Senator] Roberts stonewalled attempts

to investigate everything from the manipulation of intelligence in the rush to war inIraq, President Bush’s warrantless wiretaps, and even allegations of the use of

torture by the CIA,” according to Associated Press (AP) reports. [30] The same

report also indicates that the U.S. President was in Wichita for a politicalfundraiser, and stopped at a new Boys and Girls Club of America to defray thecosts of getting to Wichita via Air Force One for Senator Roberts’ campaign.

Military sources have reported that a B-52H Stratofortress was flown to Wichita sothat Boeing’s engineers could take a look in order to make adjustments to the war

planes for a new military program. [31] Nothing has been reported about any

private meetings between President Bush Jr. or any of his presidential staff and the personnel from Minot. However, reports have been made of meetings between

military families and the U.S. President in his office on Air Force One.

General Moseley, the Air Force Chief of Staff, had previously visited Minot on

March 14-15, 2007, a month before Minot airmen went to Wichita. [32] If a secret

mission was being prepared, these events could have played a role in the recruiting

phases for an important internal special operation. Following their recruitment,

Minot servicemen could have symbolically met General Moseley or White Houseofficials to understand that the mission was being sanctioned by the highest ranks

and offices in the United States.

Orders had to Come from the Top: Treason of the Highest Order

Orders had to come from higher up.



The operation would not have been possible without the involvement of more than

one individual in the highest ranks of the U.S. Air Force command structure andthe Pentagon.

The only way to bypass these separate chains of command is “to be above them”(from higher up), as well as have the possibility of directly overseeing their

implementation.

These orders would then have been communicated to lower levels in the US AirForce command chain in different locations, to allow for a so-called “oversight” to

proceed. The alternative to this is “an alternative chain of command,” although this

also needs someone in the highest ranks of office to organize and oversee.

The post given to Riechers was politically motivated, given his track record in the

U.S. Air Force. Riechers had been in a position of responsibility in the U.S. AirForce special operational support activities; something he had in common withRussell Dougherty, the former SAC commander. He would have been one of the

best suited individuals for making arrangements in the case of an alternative

command structure for a secretive nuclear operation. Moreover, he already had arecord of corrupt behaviour through his involvement with the Commonwealth

Research Institute. The possible involvement of U.S. Air Force weathermen and

special operatives raises many questions as to what exactly was the objective ofmaking the nuclear weapons disappear. [33]

The Investigation

The U.S. Air Force has publicly stated that it has made a “mistake,” which is veryunusual and almost unprecedented for a military organization that tries to

continually assure the American public of their safety.

The fact that seventy or more military personnel have been punished in the case of

the “lost” nuclear weapons does not mean, however, that the senior commandingofficers responsible for having carried out the special operation will be identified

and punished.

Quite the opposite. The investigation could indeed result in a camouflage of the

chain of command, where lower-ranking military personnel are accused and court-martialed, with a view to ultimately protecting those in high office who have

committed an act of treason.



The series of deaths mentioned above, may have no ties whatsoever with the the

August flight in question from Minot to Barksdale, but the issues of command,monitoring, and authorization cannot be overlooked or ignored. The American

people have before them a case of treason that involves the highest offices of

government and most probably the offices of the President and the Vice-President.

Once again, the “C2” process involves the Office of the President andCommander-in-Chief. It is an established line of command, without which nuclear

weapons could not have been deployed or armed as they were in U.S.A.F. BaseMinot. It is this command element that establishes the basis of authorization

through which “absolute control of nuclear weapons” is maintained “at all times.”

With time it is possible that military servicemen and servicewomen may comeforward with more information.

However, in the meantime, there has been a streamlining of military personnel at

U.S.A.F. Minot. Base personnel have become dispersed and reassigned to otherlocations.

If they on the grounds of loyalty to their country, the United States of America,come forward and reveal what has taken place, they are to be saluted with full

honour by all ranks. As George Orwell said, “In a time of universal deceit, telling

the truth becomes a revolutionary act,” and indeed these are deceitful times.

The fact that U.S. Air Force officers came forward and reported this incident iscontrary to U.S. military procedures, regulations, and laws. The U.S. military will

never release any information that will risk or damage its reputation. Any

information in regards to nuclear weapons can not be released without prior

consultations with and authorization by the White House.

The nuclear weapons were armed and moved deliberately. Orders had to have

come from the highest echelons of the U.S. government.

The question is what exactly were they meant for? Were they part of a war agenda

or something else?

Bush Threatens Iran with Nuclear Weapons



What adds intrigue to an understanding of the missing nukes, are the international

events and war games taking place just after the “lost” nuclear weapons incident,not to mention the President’s ongoing threats to attack Iran with nuclear weapons

and Vice President Cheney's repeated warnings that a second large scale terrorist

attack on America is under preparation, with the support of Iran.

In the U.S., under the Vigilant Shield 2008 war games (initiated in September,2007) and the TOPOFF anti-terrorism exercises, some form of nuclear terrorist

attack on American soil had been envisaged. The roles of Russia and China hadalso been contemplated. The latter would be “a likely scenario” had the U.S.

attacked Iran and as a result Russia and China had decided to intervene. [34] Under

Vigilant Shield 2007, held in 2006, the possibility of a nuclear war with Iran’sallies, Russia and China, had been contemplated in the war games scenario.

The Kremlin has responded by holding its own war games.[35]

An unveiled threat to trigger World War Three has been the response of George W.

Bush Jr. to Russia’s statements warning that a U.S. sponsored war with Ir an, could

result in an escalating World War III scenario.

The six nuclear warheads were not meant for use in theatre operations against Iran.

This is obvious because if they were then they would have been deployed via the proper procedural routes without the need to hide anything. Besides, there are

already theatre-level nuclear weapons ready and armed in Europe and the Middle

East for any possible Middle Eastern mission. There was something more to theincident.

It is also worth noting that the Israelis launched an attack on an alleged Syrian

nuclear facility that both Tel Aviv and the White House claim was constructed

with the assistance of North Korea. This event has been used, through official

statements and media disinformation, to draw a Syria-Iran-North Korea nuclear

proliferation axis. [36]

In regards to the case of the missing nuclear weapons, weathermen and military personnel with an expertise in space and missile components were involved. The

incident took place during a time when the U.S. missile shield projects in Eastern

Europe and Eastern Asia, directed against Russia and China, were raisinginternational tensions and alarms. On October 23, 2007, President Bush Jr. stated:

“The need for missile defence in Europe is real and I believe it’s urgent.” [37]



Nuclear warfare, the militarization of space, and “the missile shield” are

interrelated military processes. The overtones of Nuclear Primacy are hanging inthe air. One of the goals of the U.S. military has been to effectively shield itself

from a potential Russian or potential Russian and Chinese nuclear response to a

nuclear “First Strike” from the U.S. military. [38] The militarization of space isalso deeply linked to this military project. Like their advanced knowledge about

the U.S. missile shield project, Russian and Chinese officials have got wind ofthese ambitions and are fully aware of what the U.S. intends to do.

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is an independent writer based in Ottawa specializing

in Middle Eastern affair. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on

Globalization (CRG).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTES

[1] Sarah Baxter, US hits panic button as air force ‘loses’ nuclear missiles, The

Times (U.K.), October 21, 2007.

[2] The Nuclear Reactions Data Centres also estimated that the W80-1 stockpile

included a total of 1,400 warheads remain in stockpile associated with the 900ALCMs that are in storage with their warheads removed.

[3] Baxter, US hits panic button, Op. cit.

[4] John Andrew Prime, Barksdale bombers expand B-52 capabilities, TheSheveport Times, August 27, 2007.

[5] Baxter, US hits panic button, Op. cit.; Major-General Newton is also

responsible for formulating policy supporting air, space, nuclear, counter-

proliferation, homeland, weather, and cyber operations. Because of his role as oneof the Air Forces’ key flag officers in regards to nuclear issues and counter -

proliferation he has been involved in war planning in regards to Iran, Israeli preparations for attacks on Syria, and the 2006 Israeli war against Lebanon.



[6] Robert Stormer, Nuke transportation story has explosive implications, FortWorth Star-Telegram, Octobers 8, 2007.

[7] Ibid.; To help ensure adequate shipboard security, TLAM-N is protected by anintrusion detection alarm system that indicates an intrusion, both visually and

audibly, at a continuously manned station capable of dispatching a security team.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Michael Hoffman, B-52 mistakenly flies with nukes aboard, Military Times,September 10, 2007; Associated Press sources also made the same report. MilitaryTimes simply changed their article and AP withdrew its report on the basis of a

factual error.

[12] Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Defence (DoD), Year

2000 Status of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency Nuclear Weapon Information

Tracking Systems, Report No. 99-235 (August 19, 1999).

[13] Michael Hoffman, Commander disciplined for nuclear mistake, Militarty

Times, September 7, 2007.

[14] Minot Airman dies while on leave, Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs,September 12, 2007.

[15] Body of missing Air Force captain found, Associated Press, September 10,

2007.

[16] Kimberly Wilson, Portland police seek Air Force weatherman missing on trip,

The Oregonian, September 5, 2007.

[17] U.S. Air Force operatives that are tasked with recovery and medical treatment

of personnel in war environments, as well as handling astronauts returning fromspace. They are the only members of the U.S. military that are specially trained and

equipped to conduct personnel recovery operations in hostile or denied areas as a primary mission.



[18] Victims in Saturday motorcycle accident identified, The Sheveport Times,September 16, 2007; Notice of Active Duty Death, The Bombardier, September

21, 2007, p.1.

[19] John Andrew Prime, Caddo deputies work double fatality accident, The

Sheveport Times, September 15, 2007.

[20] Minot Airman dies in motorcycle accident, Minot Air Force Base PublicAffairs, July 18, 2007.

[21] Minot Airman identified, Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs, July 5, 2007.

[22] Authorities identify Minot airman killed in crash, Associated Press, July 5,

2007.

[23] Baxter, US hits panic button, Op. cit.

[24] Air Force official found dead, The Tribune-Democrat, October 16, 2007;Ginger Thompson and Eric Schmitt, Top Air Force Official Dies in Apparent

Suicide, The New York Times, October 16, 2007.

[25] Robert O’Harrow Jr., Air Force Arranged No-Work Contract: Experts

Question Official’s Deal With Nonprofit, The Washington Post, October 1, 2007,

p.A01.

[26] Ibid.

[27] Top US Air Force official ‘suicided’ [sic] as Iran war nears, Pravda, October

16, 2007.

[28] Yvonne Shinhoster Lamb, Obituaries: Russell E. Dougherty, The WashingtonPost, October 13, 2007, p.B06.

[29] General Dougherty, former SAC commander, dies, The Bombardier,

September 21, 2007, p.9.

[30] Deb Reichmann, Bush Raises Money for Kansas Senator, Associated Press,June 15, 2007.



[31] Warbirds meet commander and chief, Minot Air Force Base Public Affairs,June 22, 2007.

[32] Staff Sergeant Trevor Tiernan, CSAF visits Minot, Minot Air Force BasePublic Affairs, March 16, 2007.

[33] Infra. n.38.

[34] Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Vigilant Shield 2008: Terrorism, Air Defences,

and the Domestic Deployment of the US Military, Centre for Research on

Globalization (CRG), October 6, 2007; Michel Chossoduvsky, DangerousCrossroads: US Sponsored War Games, Centre for Research on Globalization

(CRG), October 6, 2007; The March to War: NATO Preparing for War with

Serbia? Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), October 19, 2007.

[35] Michel Chossudovsky, New Cold War: Simultaneously, Russia and America

Conduct Major War Games, Centre for Research on Globalization, October 16,

2007.

[36] Both the U.S. and Israeli governments cite the arrival of a North Korean shipwith alleged nuclear-related cargo as proof, but one needs only point out one fact

to dislodge this claim. The U.S. government has setup an internationally illegal

program involved in policing the seas and maritime traffic, the InternationalProliferation Initiative (IPI). Under the IPI the U.S. has been illegally stopping

North Korean vessels and inspecting them, especially when they have suspectedsuspicious materials. Hereto, North Korea has not been given any carte blanches

from vessel inspections. The U.S. Navy and NATO vessels have a virtual cordon

of the waterways around the Middle East from the Indian Ocean to the Read Sea

and Mediterranean Sea. If the North Korean vessel had nuclear materials it would

never have reached Syria.

[37] Missile shield is ‘urgent’ - Bush, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC),October 23, 2007.

The U.S. is well in the process of implementing the recommendations of theProject for the New American Century (PNAC); “[The United States must]

develop and deploy missile defences to defend the American homeland andAmerican allies, and to provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the



world,” and “Control the new ‘international commons’ of space and cyberspace

and pave the way for the creation of a new military service — U.S. Space Forces — with the mission of space control.”

Thomas Donnelly et al., Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces, andResources For A New Century (The Project for the New American Century:

September 2000), p.v.

[38] It is here that two things should be noted in regards to physics andmagnetospheric physics; Firstly, nuclear explosions from the air are different than

ground-based nuclear explosions in many ways (including contamination levels),

but the weather and wind direction are major unknowns or variables; Secondly, asa fundamental natural law energy never disappears, it only changes or is

transferred. The energy from nuclear explosions can theoretically be transferred

into the Earth’ magnetic radiation fields, called the Van Allen Belt or the VanAllen Belts, and used to energize and excite various particles, sub-atomic particles,and ions. Tentatively, if manipulated this can have harmful results on surface areas,

including burning electronic and communication devices, and military applications

such as disrupting satellites in space. If this were possible Russian, Chinese,Iranian, or Indian military defences, communications, and missile facilities could

be effortlessly neutralized.

These radiation belts also travel in loops and notionally an energized pulse set off

from an area in the U.S. could circumnavigate into an area halfway around the

globe.

In fact the U.S. military has been experimenting with manipulating the radiation

belts since the end of the Second World War. The U.S. Navy’s Project Argus,

taking place from August to September 1958, is an example. A total of five nuclearweapons were used; three atom bombs (weapons using nuclear fission) were

detonated above the Atlantic Ocean and two thermonuclear or hydrogen bombs(weapons using nuclear fusion) in the Pacific Ocean in an effort to manipulate the

Van Allen Belts.

Global Research Articles by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please support Global Research

Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers.

Your endorsement is greatly appreciated

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of theauthor and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on

Globalization.

To become a Member of Global Research

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on

community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The sourceand the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research

articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:

[email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not

always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making suchmaterial available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to

advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. Thematerial on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a

prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to

use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request

permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]

© Copyright Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, 2007

The url address of this article is:www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7158

http://www.newsfollowup.com/flight77_32.htm#next 911

Missing Nukes, Treason of the Highest Order and B-52 Nukes Headed for Iran- Air Force Refused to Fly...

Documents

Transcript of Missing Nukes, Treason of the Highest Order and B-52 Nukes Headed for Iran- Air Force Refused to Fly...